powder choice

[TommyD]

Hi Veral,

I have been casting the 160 grain FN BB .358 bullets from my new mold and I am in the process of load development for my 357 mag GP100.

The load I want will launch these little beauties at 1200 fps. About the same momentum impulse as the standard GI .45 auto. Pleasant and easy to shoot for plinking and target. It should also be quite satisfactory for pest control at my country place. Not a hunting load. For that, will continue to partake in the joy attendant to all things 45.

From the manufacturers data tables this should be easily achievable with either Hodgdon's Universal or Accurate No. 9. Universal will probably give a cleaner burn.

Is there any downside to using Universal vs Accurate No. 9? Will there be any significant long term difference in the wear and tear on the gun due to differing temperature and pressure curves?

I ask this because I recently came across posts from Bob Baker that  Freedom Arms recommends avoiding Lil'Gun Powder in both their .454 and .357 revolvers. it seems that even though the pressure is less with Lil'Gun than H110, the burn temperature is substantially hotter and they are seeing accelerated wear on the forcing cones.

Tom

[Veral]

  I've never used Lil'gun, but many flake powder give high pressure increases with rising temperatures, and especially if the hoad is high pressure to begin with, or at 'normal' tempertures for your area.  Also, most and maybe all flake powders do wear the throat quite rapidly when used with hot loads.  The ball powders burn much cooler and don't do on pressure excursions with temperature increase nearly as bad as the flake powders.

  So, if you want to shoot a LOT, like 5000 rounds a year, go with #9 and wear ear muffs to protect against the muzzle blast.  If you love the gentle life, and being able to grab up your pistol from the tractor tool box, holster or whatever and knock off a pest, use Universal, even if it burns the barrel out a bit faster.  Your ears will remain usefull  at picking up high pitch sounds a lot longer than mine have!!   After a lot nicer to bury a worn out gun than wear hearing aids to keep your wife from yelling because you can't hear her and she thinks you are ignoring her!

  A severly worn throat doesn't really junk a gun anyhow.  Just develop loads that work well in it or trade it to someone who isn't appalled with 3 inch groups at 25 yards.  Or maybe a brighter mindset is to consider the fact that in todays world, someone might steal it before you are ready to quit using it, and you'll be happy that you took the best part of it's life before the jerk ripped you off.   

  When the throat wears enough that accuracy begins to fall off, you can swith to the #9 or even H110 or 296 and get superb accuracy again, with minimal throat wear for many thousands of rounds.  By the way, my accuracy standard/requirement from a revolver is not larger groups than one inch at 25 yards, and I'm not likely to keep one very long that won't do half that, when using one of my bullet designs.   I get real cranky if I don't see a bullet hole precisely where the sights were when I feel the hammer drop.   In other words, if I pull a shot, I want a bullet hole where the sights were when the primer popped or I'll never learn what I'm doing wrong!  Accurate handguns teach one to shoot accurately better than any human instructor can ever hope to.

[TommyD]

Thanks for the info.

I agree that hearing protection is very important and I always have it with me when I know I am going to be shooting.

How does 2400 compare with #9 in terms of wear and tear on the guns? I like the fact that one does not need magnum primers with these powders, while H110/296 load data recommend the magnum primers. Keeps it simpler.

Tom

[Veral]

  2400 makes the most bombastic blast of any heavy load powder that I've ever used, and it burns out rifling lead much faster than H110 and 296.   

  A garbage man neighbor gave me a couple of large cans of it nearly 25 years ago, and the level in them never changed.  I'd rather buy new than use it up for free!

[jpuke]

Veral,
Do you dislike 2400 as a rifle powder as well?  I was thinking of using it for Trapdoor level 45/70 loads but I don't want to if it'll eat my throat.

[Veral]

  It's great for light, or low pressure rifle loads.  The wear is caused by high pressure, high velocity burning powder ripping at the throat.    However, if you are going to purchase new powder for the trapdoor, the most highly regarded by 45-70 customers wanting that type of loads seems to be 4198.
  If you already have 2400, burn it up.   Even with loads much stouter than your trapdoor is good for, 10 pounds of 2400 burned through it would only help the throat smooth out a little, which would be benificial if the throat is near the original abrupt angle.

[TommyD]

2400 is very seductive in both it's versatility and that it is so easy to light without magnum primers. But I don't want to burn out my barrel.

I am not trying to wring maximum performance out of the 357. For hunting purposes, I will continue to partake in the joy attendant to all things 45.

But what about moderate loads of 2400 in the 357? Some of the old timers shot up to 15.5 grains of 2400 in their magnums. WAY in excess of anything you will find in any modern reloading manuals. I was thinking more in the line of 13 to 13.5 grains - which is the charge that both Skeeter and Elmer put in their 38 special cases. Of course, I would be putting it in a 357 case.

13 grains gives me 1199 fps and 13.5 gives me 1312 out of my blackhawk.

Or should I just forget it and go back to AA #9?

Tom

[Veral]

  Both pressure and gas velocity would be down quite a bit compared to magnum loads, so I don't believe throat erosion would be severe.  However, A#9 also lights up real easy, burns very uniform and is easier on throats.  It is my favorite powder for near magnum loads.